CHL THE CHANGING LANDSCAPEOE - Quality Matters

[Pages:51]THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE

CHLOE

of ONLINE EDUCATION

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF ONLINE EDUCATION (CHLOE) Quality Matters & Eduventures Survey of Chief Online Officers, 2017

Ron Legon, Ph.D.

Senior Advisor for Knowledge Initiatives, Executive Director Emeritus, Quality Matters

Richard Garrett

Chief Research Officer, Eduventures

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE

CHLOE

of ONLINE EDUCATION

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..............................................................................................5 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................ 7 THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE...............................................................................10 MARKET CONDITIONS...........................................................................................12 ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT OF ONLINE PROGRAMS.........................................................................................17 TEACHING, LEARNING, AND TECHNOLOGY.....................................................33 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND OUTCOMES OF ONLINE PROGRAMS.........................................................................................39 FUTURE TOPICS: CHLOE IN THE YEARS AHEAD................................................45 METHODOLOGY..................................................................................................... 47

The CHLOE Sample..............................................................................................47 Job Titles and Report Lines of Chief Online Education........................................................................................48 IPEDS Data on Distance Learning Scale and Growth - Context for CHLOE.......................................................................49 ABOUT QUALITY MATTERS AND EDUVENTURES..............................................51

2

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE

CHLOE

of ONLINE EDUCATION

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF ONLINE EDUCATION (CHLOE) 2017

List of Figures

Figure 1. The Chief Online Education Officer's Role .......................................................................... 8 Figure 2. CHLOE 2017: Online Higher Education ? Stability more apparent than innovation........ 11 Figure 3. Fully Online Programs: Student Headcount Growth (Spring 2016 v. Spring 2015).......... 13 Figure 4. Fully Online Programs vs. Students Undergraduate 500+*.............................................. 14 Figure 5. More Competition............................................................................................................. 15 Figure 6. Change in Competitive Environment for Online Programs by Sector............................... 16 Figure 7. Management of Online Programs ? All Sectors Combined.............................................. 18 Figure 8. Centralized vs. Distributed Management by Sector and Size........................................... 19 Figure 9. Online Programs: Revenue Generators or Net Cost to Institution................................... 19 Figure 10. Online Programs: Revenue Generators or Net Cost by Program Size............................ 20 Figure 11. Tuition Rates for Online Students.................................................................................... 21 Figure 12. Distribution of Revenue from Online Programs.............................................................. 22 Figure 13. Distribution of Online Program Revenues by Program Size............................................ 23 Figure 14. Most Decisive Factor in Allocation of Resources by Sector............................................ 24 Figure 15. Most Decisive Factor in Allocation of Resources by Program Size................................. 25 Figure 16. Online Course Development Practices by Program Size................................................. 26 Figure 17. Online Course Development Practices by Sector............................................................ 27 Figure 18. OPM Services in Use........................................................................................................ 29 Figure 19. Course Ownership Patterns by Sector............................................................................. 30 Figure 20. Course Ownership Patterns by Program Size.................................................................. 31 Figure 21. Faculty Compensation for Online Course Development by Sector................................ 32 Figure 22. Faculty Compensation for Online Course Development by Program Size...................... 32 Figure 23. Online Program Enrollment at Scale Demands Asynchronous Delivery......................... 34 Figure 24. The Search for Balance: Consistency vs. Variation.......................................................... 35 Figure 25. The Search for Balance- Consistency vs. Variation by Sector......................................... 36 Figure 26. Change is coming?........................................................................................................... 36 Figure 27. How to teach and learn online?...................................................................................... 37 Figure 28. So Many Choices.............................................................................................................. 38 Figure 29. Quality Metrics Adopted and Applied Internally............................................................ 39

3

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE

CHLOE

of ONLINE EDUCATION

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF ONLINE EDUCATION (CHLOE) 2017

Figure 30. Provide Training Based On Quality Metrics..................................................................... 40 Figure 31. Online Programs Seeking External Certification ? All Sources........................................ 41 Figure 32. Use Consultants to Develop and/or Achieve Quality Metrics........................................ 42 Figure 33. Chief Online Officer Report Lines.................................................................................... 48

List of Tables

Table 1. How Online Programs are Managed and Budgeted........................................................... 17 Table 2. Fees for Online Students..................................................................................................... 21 Table 3. Strategic Priorities Affecting Online Programs.................................................................... 24 Table 4. Internal vs. External Online Course Development.............................................................. 27 Table 5. Partnerships with Online Program Management Companies............................................ 28 Table 6. Quality Metrics Most Frequently Included Among the Top Five........................................ 43 Table 7. Access to Complete or Adequate Data on Quality Metrics................................................ 44 Table 8. The CHLOE Sample 2017..................................................................................................... 47 Table 9. Chief Online Officer Report Lines by Sector....................................................................... 48 Table 10. Undergraduate "Exclusive" Distance Learning Student Headcount (Fall 2012-15)......... 49 Table 11. Graduate "Exclusive" Distance Learning Student Headcount (Fall 2012-15)................... 50

4

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE

CHLOE

of ONLINE EDUCATION

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF ONLINE EDUCATION (CHLOE) 2017

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF ONLINE EDUCATION (CHLOE) 2017

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This is the first CHLOE Survey of chief online officers at community colleges, four-year public, and four-year private, nonprofit colleges and universities. CHLOE focuses on the management of online education as it becomes a mainstream activity in a growing number of U.S. institutions. Concerns about achieving stability and reliability are overtaking earlier-stage innovation as online learning moves from an experimental phase to an established institutional function. At many institutions, management of online-related activities and responsibilities is being consolidated under the leadership of a single institutional officer, whom we designate as the chief online officer. Support functions are typically centralized while academic planning and curriculum remain decentralized. In larger online programs the tendency toward centralization of functions is greater. As a group, four-year, public institutions show the widest internal variation or inconsistency in policy. Many institutions now address online education in their strategic plans, stressing a range of objectives, such as enrollment growth, student completion, and quality enhancement. The budgeting process, however, favors investments with enrollment growth potential. Although online enrollment is still a growth engine in U.S. higher education, the rate of increase is slowing and competition is increasing, as evidenced by plans to substantially expand the number of online programs at a majority of the institutions surveyed. At some point, institutions, particularly smaller ones, need to be concerned about over-extension if supply exceeds demand. Institutions must ensure online learning serves core programs and students, not only a desire for new market growth--something that may become less realistic as competition heats up. The majority of our study's sample view online programs as revenue generators rather than drains on resources. Online tuition is commonly the same as campus tuition with differential fees covering the perceived additional costs of online development and delivery. A significant segment (37%) of private nonprofits charge online students lower than campus tuition. Most institutions distribute online revenue to meet overall institutional needs.

5

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE

CHLOE

of ONLINE EDUCATION

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF ONLINE EDUCATION (CHLOE) 2017

Wholly asynchronous delivery of online instruction dominates higher education, except in very small programs. The larger the program, the less likely there is variation in delivery tools and methods. Most institutions anticipate supplementary, not transformative, changes in online learning in the coming years. Interest in new tools and learning strategies is diffuse and noncommittal. Faculty remains central to online course development. Instructional design support is widely available, but most often is optional at the faculty member's discretion. In enterprise-level programs and many private nonprofits, however, design support is required.

Less than quarter of institutions use online program management (OPM) providers to support online program promotion and development, and for many, such partnerships are supplemental. Larger programs and private nonprofits are likely to own their online courses, while shared or faculty ownership is more common in two- and four-year public institutions. In 40% of community colleges, faculty do not receive compensation for course development, while compensation is nearly universal among larger programs and private nonprofits.

The majority of online programs have adopted quality standards for course design, program design, online faculty development, and student outcomes. Quality assurance for support services lags behind. The most commonly used input metrics are program reputation, faculty training, and faculty credentials. The most commonly used outcomes metrics are student retention/graduation rates, student academic achievement, and post-graduation student employment. There is less focus on a wider range of outcomes measures that may be of increasing interest to stakeholders, including student debt, graduate earnings, employer feedback, and alumni feedback.

Online learning's place in the mainstream of higher education is assured, but many questions remain about its long-term scope and direction. Future CHLOE Surveys will explore these themes in more detail and track the evolution of institutional policy and activity.

6

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE

CHLOE

of ONLINE EDUCATION

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF ONLINE EDUCATION (CHLOE) 2017

INTRODUCTION

We are pleased to present the findings of the inaugural CHLOE Survey on The Changing Landscape of Online Education. It is the first product of a newly formed partnership between Quality Matters (QM), a leading online learning quality assurance organization, and Eduventures, the leading higher education research and advisory firm. We believe that circumstances call for a new annual survey of issues related to the structure and management of online education and we are excited by the opportunity to provide useful information to those who develop, support, participate and benefit from it.

One factor in the decision to launch CHLOE is the recent expansion of IPEDS reporting that has provided official, if flawed, data on enrollment in online education. Related to this development is Babson Research Group's announcement in February 2017 that it is discontinuing its annual survey, Online Report Card: Tracking Online Education in the United States, which tracked the growth of online education. CHLOE will take on some of these issues, and expand into other areas in the future.

We also recognize the value of the many other surveys that help deepen our understanding of online education. Some of these surveys focus on individual sectors in higher education, e.g., the Instructional Technology Council's focus on community colleges. Others cast a wide net for opinions of faculty, administrators at various levels, and outside observers. CHLOE's approach will ultimately include the breadth of online education providers, but focus on the knowledge and views of an emerging class of chief online education officers

This focus reflects our shared belief that online education has been moving from an experimental and provisional status to a mainstream component at an increasing number of colleges and universities. This requires changes in leadership, management, finance, and strategic objectives. As of Fall 2015, the IPEDS numbers tell part of this story:

? Bigger Scale: A total of 595 two- and four-year schools reported more than 1,000 fully distance students, with most studying online, up 19% since 2012. Almost 2,000 two- and four-year schools reported more than 100 fully distance students.

? Undergraduates: There are more than 2.1 million fully distance undergraduates (12% of total); plus another 2.8 million partially distance undergraduates (17% of total).

? Graduate Students: There are about 770,000 fully distance graduate students (26% of total), plus another 243,000 studying partially at a distance (8% of total).

? By Sector: At public, four-year schools, one in 14 students are now fully distance. At private, four-year schools it's one in seven; and at public, two-year schools it's one in 19.

? Programs: 13% of Associate's programs, 9% of bachelor's programs, 18% of master's programs, and 5% of doctoral programs are fully distance.

7

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE

CHLOE

of ONLINE EDUCATION

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF ONLINE EDUCATION (CHLOE) 2017

We see the emergence at many colleges and universities of a permanent administrative position that draws together the functions and responsibilities of online education

Numbers alone do not tell the whole story. We see the emergence at many colleges and universities of a permanent administrative position that draws together the functions and responsibilities of online education, unless the institution is entirely or predominantly online. This is the individual whom we have called the "chief online education officer" (COEO), or, for convenience, the "chief online officer."

This individual is at the center of institutional planning and decision-making related to online course and program operations, and, in some cases, with oversight of online academics as well. The work of Eric Fredericksen, Associate Vice President for Online Learning at the University of Rochester, has helped define the COEO job and has surveyed the individuals fitting this description at four-year colleges and universities around the U.S. Fredericksen identified 820 such individuals out of about 1,100 institutions (75%).

While the emergence of the chief online officer is itself evidence of the mainstreaming of online education, we also believe that these individuals are in the best position to tell us how their online efforts are organized and their strategic direction. The chief online officer sits at the center of the issues and influences that determine present and future policy (see Figure 1).

Figure 1. The Chief Online Education Officer's Role

Mission

Resources

Accreditation

Faculty Needs

COEO

Student Demand

Technology

Quality Assurance

Curriculum

Through the experience and perspective of chief online officers, we hope to gain insight into current practices and trends in management, resource allocation, emerging tools, instructional innovations, quality assurance measures, regulatory issues, and more.

8

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download